|
Title: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 05:23:22 PM looking at group g, as long as getafe v anderlecht dosnt end in a draw, spurs will finish 2nd, and will be in line to face a champs league team, 7-1 shot that its rangers.
HOW GOOD WOULD THAT BE? to be honest chelski, man utd and arsenal are too good to beat over two legs, but id fancy our chances versus any1 else in the prem. im seriously hoping for a rangers spurs tie Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 19, 2007, 05:36:16 PM Glad your looking forward to your UEFA Cup campaign but it only really gets interesting at the semi final stage & Celtic v Chelsea or Man Utd would be much more interesting :P
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Bazzaboy on December 19, 2007, 05:49:34 PM Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 05:56:30 PM Glad your looking forward to your UEFA Cup campaign im not, looking for a miracle tie to have an intrest Celtic v Chelsea or Man Utd would be much more interesting :P behave yourself! your going to get pumped, youve played 6 poor performances so far in champs league, i have no idea how you have qualified. for any of the top seeds celtic are the plum tie, its almost a bye to the quarters Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Nem on December 19, 2007, 06:10:48 PM A full strength Spurs side on current form would beat Rangers over 2 legs by 2 clear goals. Also, Liverpool would beat Rangers easily.
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 19, 2007, 06:11:20 PM Glad your looking forward to your UEFA Cup campaign im not, looking for a miracle tie to have an intrest Celtic v Chelsea or Man Utd would be much more interesting :P behave yourself! your going to get pumped, youve played 6 poor performances so far in champs league, i have no idea how you have qualified. for any of the top seeds celtic are the plum tie, its almost a bye to the quarters LOL You've been saying we'll get pumped since Spartak Moscow in July ya mug rotflmfao Everyone knows how we qualified, 3 wins from 3 home games (including the reigning European & World Champions ;cupcake;) gets you 9 points, that'll do it almost every time. This coming from a guy who's team managed to get through with 7 points & 1 win a couple of years back, you really are a tool lol. BTW where were you last week after you lot bottled it as predicted? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: TightEnd on December 19, 2007, 06:13:35 PM /:-| /:-| /:-| :)up ;izimbra;
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 06:38:15 PM but you have been getting pumped since july!!!!
i can smell a whitewash coming on this year, you are a very poor side Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: CelticGeezeer on December 19, 2007, 06:40:53 PM Here have a drink on me
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 19, 2007, 06:42:37 PM i can smell a whitewash coming on this year, you are a very poor side Yes we are very poor but I think we can only improve as the season goes on, a whitewash is just wishfull thinking Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 06:44:11 PM A full strength Spurs side on current form would beat Rangers over 2 legs by 2 clear goals. Also, Liverpool would beat Rangers easily. spurs current form by which u mean this week? lol only player i would be worried about in the spurs side is mr berbatov, no wait hes away to man utd Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 06:46:41 PM i can smell a whitewash coming on this year, you are a very poor side Yes we are very poor but I think we can only improve as the season goes on, a whitewash is just wishfull thinking and thinking you ll improve isnt wishful thinking? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 19, 2007, 07:09:31 PM i can smell a whitewash coming on this year, you are a very poor side Yes we are very poor but I think we can only improve as the season goes on, a whitewash is just wishfull thinking and thinking you ll improve isnt wishful thinking? I'm assuming we'll do some business in January. I also think it will be a record low points total to win the league this year & as much we're crap we'll probably still win it Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 07:47:27 PM i love celtics business as you call it, going to championship sides with money off coupens trying to find that "celtic class" addition.
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Div on December 19, 2007, 07:57:15 PM Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 19, 2007, 08:02:01 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere.
Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: GlasgowBandit on December 19, 2007, 09:39:52 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 19, 2007, 10:06:42 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Scottish Dave on December 19, 2007, 10:32:24 PM i can smell a whitewash coming on this year, you are a very poor side Yes we are very poor but I think we can only improve as the season goes on, a whitewash is just wishfull thinking and thinking you ll improve isnt wishful thinking? Well we do have an extra 6Million Bucks to spend thatks to our easy qualification from the group of death in the Champions league.... ...I would also love to see a Rangers spurs tie....i mean, have rangers ever been knocked out a european comp by a team that goes on to get relegated from their domestic league??? now that would be funny....but not as funny as your belated european comments that we all knew were on the tip of your tongue, just waiting on a wee celtic domestic slip up for you to spew them all over the board....so predictable! PS Where is my £1,000 Broxi boy??? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: GlasgowBandit on December 19, 2007, 10:45:22 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! Hibs would beat Rangers over 2 legs never mind Celtic and Rangers. We have heard this nonsense before in the past 4 years alone Celtic have taken care of Man United, Liverpool and Blackburn when we have faced them in Europe as for Newcastle been ranked higher in the club rankings really means nuffin - I mean when was the last time they actually won anything? Ha for years the UEFA rankings made out England where one of the best teams in the world. LMAO!! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 19, 2007, 10:50:40 PM UEFA rankings have no effect on world rankings.
When was the last time Celtic won anything that was contested by more than two teams?!! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 11:04:00 PM i dont know how much extra cash u recieve, but does it really matter?
celtic dont spend it. as for group of death, behave, aberdeens uefa cup group is harder. also if celtics games were two legged affairs...... shaktar win 3-2 milan win 2-2 away goals benfica 1-1 draw rangers.... lyon 3-3 draw stuttgart 4-4 rangers on away goals barcelona 2-0 Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Scottish Dave on December 19, 2007, 11:16:16 PM as for group of death, behave, aberdeens uefa cup group is harder. Ha ha ha i really have missed you. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 11:40:13 PM spurs finish 2nd, get in
also possible helsingborgs, spartak moscow or braga. stilll 4 grouos to finish, but glamour ties look odds against I WANT SPURS!!!!!!!!! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Div on December 19, 2007, 11:41:21 PM i dont know how much extra cash u recieve, but does it really matter? celtic dont spend it. as for group of death, behave, aberdeens uefa cup group is harder. also if celtics games were two legged affairs...... shaktar win 3-2 milan win 2-2 away goals benfica 1-1 draw rangers.... lyon 3-3 draw stuttgart 4-4 rangers on away goals barcelona 2-0 Is that why Rangers are out? Master tactician Walter Smith misread the rules and thought it was a knock out tournament? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 11:42:43 PM i can see why you think hes a master, strachans from the mcleish school of tactics
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: lazaroonie on December 19, 2007, 11:46:00 PM spurs finish 2nd, get in also possible helsingborgs, spartak moscow or braga. stilll 4 grouos to finish, but glamour ties look odds against I WANT SPURS!!!!!!!!! ha, the thought of helsingborgs and the return of larsson must scare the absolute shite out of ye...... Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 11:48:10 PM yes, id rather avoid them, strong outfit ;booder;
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Div on December 19, 2007, 11:48:18 PM i can see why you think hes a master, strachans from the mcleish school of tactics Rangers could have done with McLeish last week when they were eliminated from the Champions League. He managed to qualify with 7 points rotflmfao rotflmfao Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: lazaroonie on December 19, 2007, 11:51:10 PM yes, id rather avoid them, strong outfit ;booder; lets face it, anyone who is organised, got a bit of pace and is remotely interested in playing football is going to be a match enough for Rangers. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 19, 2007, 11:54:14 PM thankfully that rules out most of the uefa cup teams
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Scottish Dave on December 20, 2007, 12:19:46 AM ohhhhh helsingborg, now there's a tie!
you do realise henke would batter 3 past that idiot McGregor! Spartak would piss all over hutton and Rangers.....im beginning to look more forward to rangers tie than ours....we are used to playing the creme de la creme anyway, it will just be the same old same old for the reigning champions Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rod Paradise on December 20, 2007, 09:49:57 AM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! That's more an argument against a) The national contribution to a team's coeff when they're not in Europe. & b) the inequalities of the coeff points given out in the UEFA against the CL. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 20, 2007, 05:22:36 PM Imagine Robbie Keane scoring at Fortress Ibrox & doing his trademark marksman celebration!!!! ;snoopy'sguns;
Cue permarage overdrive ;grr; ;grr; ;grr;, it would make Boruc blessing himself look like a Sunday school picnic (Church of Scotland obv) Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Nem on December 20, 2007, 05:39:26 PM Imagine Robbie Keane scoring at Fortress Ibrox & doing his trademark marksman celebration!!!! ;snoopy'sguns; Cue permarage overdrive ;grr; ;grr; ;grr;, it would make Boruc blessing himself look like a Sunday school picnic (Church of Scotland obv) He doesn't do that celebration anymore, because he finally realised that it is pretty lame and he also sprained his wrist and lost his place when he done it a couple of seasons back. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 20, 2007, 05:42:32 PM Imagine Robbie Keane scoring at Fortress Ibrox & doing his trademark marksman celebration!!!! ;snoopy'sguns; Cue permarage overdrive ;grr; ;grr; ;grr;, it would make Boruc blessing himself look like a Sunday school picnic (Church of Scotland obv) He doesn't do that celebration anymore, because he finally realised that it is pretty lame and he also sprained his wrist and lost his place when he done it a couple of seasons back. I think he might bring it back for a special occasion ;) Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 20, 2007, 06:25:18 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! That's more an argument against a) The national contribution to a team's coeff when they're not in Europe. & b) the inequalities of the coeff points given out in the UEFA against the CL. I'm happy that someone with more football understanding than I could ever want has come up with a pretty decent system. The contribution when not in the competition earning points is less than 5% (which is probably undervalued). Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 20, 2007, 07:27:49 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! That's more an argument against a) The national contribution to a team's coeff when they're not in Europe. & b) the inequalities of the coeff points given out in the UEFA against the CL. I'm happy that someone with more football understanding than I could ever want has come up with a pretty decent system. The contribution when not in the competition earning points is less than 5% (which is probably undervalued). Newcastle had 94.61 points at the begining of this season, 22.6 of these came from the country coefficient. Even taking into account Newcastle contributed to these points in 4 of the last 5 seasons you actually earned nearer 20% of your points because of Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool & to a lesser extent Spurs & Boro. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 20, 2007, 08:30:14 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! That's more an argument against a) The national contribution to a team's coeff when they're not in Europe. & b) the inequalities of the coeff points given out in the UEFA against the CL. I'm happy that someone with more football understanding than I could ever want has come up with a pretty decent system. The contribution when not in the competition earning points is less than 5% (which is probably undervalued). Newcastle had 94.61 points at the begining of this season, 22.6 of these came from the country coefficient. Even taking into account Newcastle contributed to these points in 4 of the last 5 seasons you actually earned nearer 20% of your points because of Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool & to a lesser extent Spurs & Boro. I was right in what I said. 5% when not playing in them!! We are responsible for a bigger % of the country points than all but Liverpool, Chelsea and Man United. So 20% will be a little high for the overall. Having said all this you can take all our country coeffiecient points away and still be above celtic!! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 20, 2007, 08:48:15 PM The top 9 or 10 sides in the EPL would be Rangers over 2 legs. Even with an Ibrox european atmosphere. Both Rangers and Celtic's (and Scotland's) performances in Europe recently have been above their level. (Credit for that) You only have to look at the transfers in and out of the two teams with the EPL to see that there's a class difference. Who did Newcastle get in Europe this season? Oops relegation fears. Ah, attack to deflect the valid point?!! LOL, only fear of relegation I have is that Sunderland and Boro get it and we'll lose guarenteed points!! As to Newcastle not being in Europe it is slightly trickier to get into it in England! I mean gretna (who would be League 1 down here!) will get within 7 places of it in Scotland this year!! Oh and there's the small matter of Newcastle being ranked 13 places higher than Celtic (and 34 ahead of Rangers) in the current Uefa rankings - based on our recent UEFA performances! Them's the facts! That's more an argument against a) The national contribution to a team's coeff when they're not in Europe. & b) the inequalities of the coeff points given out in the UEFA against the CL. I'm happy that someone with more football understanding than I could ever want has come up with a pretty decent system. The contribution when not in the competition earning points is less than 5% (which is probably undervalued). Newcastle had 94.61 points at the begining of this season, 22.6 of these came from the country coefficient. Even taking into account Newcastle contributed to these points in 4 of the last 5 seasons you actually earned nearer 20% of your points because of Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool & to a lesser extent Spurs & Boro. I was right in what I said. 5% when not playing in them!! We are responsible for a bigger % of the country points than all but Liverpool, Chelsea and Man United. So 20% will be a little high for the overall. Having said all this you can take all our country coeffiecient points away and still be above celtic!! Arsenal also earned more points than Newcastle but yes you would have more points than Celtic due to decent runs in the UEFA Cup added to the country coefficient. This another area where the ranking system is flawed as you get the same points for beating weaker teams & you also get to play more games in the UEFA Cup if you go fairly deep. It would actually benefit Celtics coefficient to qualify for the Champions League group stage, pick up 7 or 8 points then drop into UEFA Cup where they would have more chance of picking up coefficient points than in the Champions League, to me thats just plain wrong. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 20, 2007, 09:32:28 PM I disagree that Arsenal have contributed more but it neither here nor there! (15 by Arsenal, 18.5 by Newcastle - from UEFA cup AND Champions League!)
The right teams (ie Chamions league winners and semi finalists) are always at the top of it so it can't favour UEFa cup'ers that much. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Div on December 20, 2007, 09:37:47 PM The UEFA Cup effect is most noticeable for Romania. Currently ranked 6th strongest country in Europe. Just behind Germany and ahead of amongst others Russia, Portugal, Netherlands and Czech Republic.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~kassiesa/bert/uefa/data/method3/crank2008.html Last year Seville got 31 points for winning the UEFA Cup. Milan got 28 for winning the CL. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 20, 2007, 10:20:33 PM rangers spurs
aberdeen everton celtic chelski/manu must be at least one of these, not had a knockout battle of britain in ages Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 20, 2007, 11:16:36 PM I disagree that Arsenal have contributed more but it neither here nor there! (15 by Arsenal, 18.5 by Newcastle - from UEFA cup AND Champions League!) The right teams (ie Chamions league winners and semi finalists) are always at the top of it so it can't favour UEFa cup'ers that much. I don't think you fully understand how the points work, they are accumulated over the last 5 seasons. Arsenal have contributed more in that time than Man Utd & Chelsea nevermind Newcastle. Also on the one occasion you qualified for the Champions League in the last 5 years you accumulated 15.52 points, in the next 3 years you played in the UEFA Cup you achieved 24, 27 & 22 so yes it does affect the ratings quite significantly outside the very top clubs who consistently go deep in the Champions League. The only reason UEFA Cuppers don't get to the very top of the rankings is because they either progress to the Champions League (eg Porto & Seville) or they fail to qualify for Europe at all (eg Newcastle, Parma, Espanyol). Espanyol accumulated more points than any other club last season (35.27) & lost the UEFA Cup Final to Seville who were 2nd highest (31.27) while Milan won the Champions League but were only 5th highest points scorers with 27.93. The previous year Steua Bucharest were ranked 4th & Middlesborough 6th! Do you still think the system is fair? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 21, 2007, 12:04:00 AM wrecking my thread with your dodgy paranoia, open up a new thread "how celtic are hard done by" im sure it ll have plenty views
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: fergus8 on December 21, 2007, 12:49:53 PM well thats rangers celtic and aberdeen all out of europe in one pick of the balls. and even if rangers scrape past panathanikos its werder bremen in lying in wait, mission ******.
Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 21, 2007, 01:12:30 PM I disagree that Arsenal have contributed more but it neither here nor there! (15 by Arsenal, 18.5 by Newcastle - from UEFA cup AND Champions League!) The right teams (ie Chamions league winners and semi finalists) are always at the top of it so it can't favour UEFa cup'ers that much. I don't think you fully understand how the points work, they are accumulated over the last 5 seasons. Arsenal have contributed more in that time than Man Utd & Chelsea nevermind Newcastle. Also on the one occasion you qualified for the Champions League in the last 5 years you accumulated 15.52 points, in the next 3 years you played in the UEFA Cup you achieved 24, 27 & 22 so yes it does affect the ratings quite significantly outside the very top clubs who consistently go deep in the Champions League. The only reason UEFA Cuppers don't get to the very top of the rankings is because they either progress to the Champions League (eg Porto & Seville) or they fail to qualify for Europe at all (eg Newcastle, Parma, Espanyol). Espanyol accumulated more points than any other club last season (35.27) & lost the UEFA Cup Final to Seville who were 2nd highest (31.27) while Milan won the Champions League but were only 5th highest points scorers with 27.93. The previous year Steua Bucharest were ranked 4th & Middlesborough 6th! Do you still think the system is fair? We went a lot further in the UEFA cup (& won more games) than we did in the Champions league (mainly due to the two league stage at that time). I would imagine the system takes account of teams that do well in the UEFA progressing onto the Champions league. (which allows the table to look right) The system is based on a 5 year period - so when you break it down and look at one year it can seem strange. With the league formats in the competitions you may get annomalies for a team doing poorly but qualifying from their league and gaining less points than a team they go further than. But over 5 years it will even out. The table looks right, so yes I do still think the system is fair. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rod Paradise on December 21, 2007, 03:04:30 PM I disagree that Arsenal have contributed more but it neither here nor there! (15 by Arsenal, 18.5 by Newcastle - from UEFA cup AND Champions League!) The right teams (ie Chamions league winners and semi finalists) are always at the top of it so it can't favour UEFa cup'ers that much. I don't think you fully understand how the points work, they are accumulated over the last 5 seasons. Arsenal have contributed more in that time than Man Utd & Chelsea nevermind Newcastle. Also on the one occasion you qualified for the Champions League in the last 5 years you accumulated 15.52 points, in the next 3 years you played in the UEFA Cup you achieved 24, 27 & 22 so yes it does affect the ratings quite significantly outside the very top clubs who consistently go deep in the Champions League. The only reason UEFA Cuppers don't get to the very top of the rankings is because they either progress to the Champions League (eg Porto & Seville) or they fail to qualify for Europe at all (eg Newcastle, Parma, Espanyol). Espanyol accumulated more points than any other club last season (35.27) & lost the UEFA Cup Final to Seville who were 2nd highest (31.27) while Milan won the Champions League but were only 5th highest points scorers with 27.93. The previous year Steua Bucharest were ranked 4th & Middlesborough 6th! Do you still think the system is fair? We went a lot further in the UEFA cup (& won more games) than we did in the Champions league (mainly due to the two league stage at that time). I would imagine the system takes account of teams that do well in the UEFA progressing onto the Champions league. (which allows the table to look right) The system is based on a 5 year period - so when you break it down and look at one year it can seem strange. With the league formats in the competitions you may get annomalies for a team doing poorly but qualifying from their league and gaining less points than a team they go further than. But over 5 years it will even out. The table looks right, so yes I do still think the system is fair. Think that point whooshed by there.... The problem is that a) you play more games in the UEFA cup allowing more points, b) the teams are on average worse teams so the points are easier gained c) the clubs who take a run in the UEFA Cup and show an equal improvement in the league & play in the Champion's League more than the UEFA, are passed by the occaissional run in the UEFA teams. Just because you like the results doesn't mean that the system is fair. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rooky9 on December 21, 2007, 04:05:56 PM I completely understand the point cheers.
A fair system to have rankings for European clubs will have the best clubs, with the best results at the top, and the clubs with the worst record at the bottom. The table produced by the system they use has that - so I think it is fair. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 21, 2007, 05:28:41 PM wrecking my thread with your dodgy paranoia, open up a new thread "how celtic are hard done by" im sure it ll have plenty views What are you on about I'm not talking about Celtic, we actually benefitted from the flawed system in 2003 as Rangers have as well in the last few years. You are obsessed with Celtic are you sure you're not a closet Tim? Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Teacake on December 21, 2007, 05:30:35 PM I disagree that Arsenal have contributed more but it neither here nor there! (15 by Arsenal, 18.5 by Newcastle - from UEFA cup AND Champions League!) The right teams (ie Chamions league winners and semi finalists) are always at the top of it so it can't favour UEFa cup'ers that much. I don't think you fully understand how the points work, they are accumulated over the last 5 seasons. Arsenal have contributed more in that time than Man Utd & Chelsea nevermind Newcastle. Also on the one occasion you qualified for the Champions League in the last 5 years you accumulated 15.52 points, in the next 3 years you played in the UEFA Cup you achieved 24, 27 & 22 so yes it does affect the ratings quite significantly outside the very top clubs who consistently go deep in the Champions League. The only reason UEFA Cuppers don't get to the very top of the rankings is because they either progress to the Champions League (eg Porto & Seville) or they fail to qualify for Europe at all (eg Newcastle, Parma, Espanyol). Espanyol accumulated more points than any other club last season (35.27) & lost the UEFA Cup Final to Seville who were 2nd highest (31.27) while Milan won the Champions League but were only 5th highest points scorers with 27.93. The previous year Steua Bucharest were ranked 4th & Middlesborough 6th! Do you still think the system is fair? We went a lot further in the UEFA cup (& won more games) than we did in the Champions league (mainly due to the two league stage at that time). I would imagine the system takes account of teams that do well in the UEFA progressing onto the Champions league. (which allows the table to look right) The system is based on a 5 year period - so when you break it down and look at one year it can seem strange. With the league formats in the competitions you may get annomalies for a team doing poorly but qualifying from their league and gaining less points than a team they go further than. But over 5 years it will even out. The table looks right, so yes I do still think the system is fair. The table looks right until you get to Newcastle at 11! Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: Rod Paradise on December 21, 2007, 11:53:45 PM I completely understand the point cheers. A fair system to have rankings for European clubs will have the best clubs, with the best results at the top, and the clubs with the worst record at the bottom. The table produced by the system they use has that - so I think it is fair. Now I know you're at the wind up ;D How can Newcastle be anywhere close to the best clubs? They're not even that close to the best in the EPL. Like I say results in the UEFA cup gain too many coeff points - and I know it because we got the benefit of it a few years back (although we went on to feature in the Champions League from it). Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: NoflopsHomer on December 22, 2007, 12:08:52 AM I completely understand the point cheers. A fair system to have rankings for European clubs will have the best clubs, with the best results at the top, and the clubs with the worst record at the bottom. The table produced by the system they use has that - so I think it is fair. Now I know you're at the wind up ;D How can Newcastle be anywhere close to the best clubs? They're not even that close to the best in the EPL. Like I say results in the UEFA cup gain too many coeff points - and I know it because we got the benefit of it a few years back (although we went on to feature in the Champions League from it). Rod called it the EPL... I'm going to get my gun. Title: Re: spurs v rangers Post by: seven2unsuited on December 22, 2007, 07:51:41 PM how many teams can boast to retaining the texaco cup, newcastle are european powerhouses :)up
http://www.nufc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/RecordsDetail/0,,10278~223384,00.html |